babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

Student strike enters dangerous phase #7

Comments

Seems to me the issue is preventing tuition hikes. Please explain to me how preventing students who for whatever reason do not support the closure of classes is in any way compromise. Because frankly, I don't think it helps the cause one bit.

I don't know who you are talking to since I certainly never argued the above. Your shadow boxing however is impressive for its foot work.

The purpose of shutting down classes is to make the government change its policy. The students overwhelming and democratically support that. Some students like some workers feel it is their right to go to work or school. I think they are scabs i.e. the lowest form of life.

It is like arguing that scabs are not so bad because they too need to feed their families. People who make those kinds of arguments IMO just don't understand solidarity. In this dispute if a small number of students return to classes and the professors are forced to teach them then the large majority will be faced with backing down or losing their tuition because they will all get an Incomplete at best. There are consequences.

Kropotkin, in the first place, I am not just talking to you, and secondly, if you are comparing students who want to, or decide they have to, attend class to scabs, then what are you arguing?

Unless I misunderstand the legal circumstances here are not the same as in a job action. You can make whatever accusation you want about not understanding solidarity, but I question whether this is a wise or effective course of action just to prevent attendance by 50 or so students who don't support the strike.

If the classes continue on it is the same as when the boss continues production at a struck plant. The students that cross will get the benefit that striking students will be denied. If everyone loses a year that is their chose. For some students to say, "we want do not lose anything get the fuck out of way" and then arrive with a police state escort to help them cross the line is the antithesis of solidarity and for me is certainly akin to scab behaviour.

Unless someone here can point out anything different, I do not see how it is not the same as a labour dispute, or falls under any legislation that would require someone to respect a picket line or the shutting down of a facility.

And no, individual students are not bound to follow the decision by their student govenrment any more that you are I are bound to follow the pronouncements that come out of Mr. Harper's mouth just because he got elected.

The issue is not whether or not the students have a just cause in resisting tuition hikes. They do. The question is whether they are justified in preventing a small minority of students, supported by an injunction, from attending class. And more importantly, is there any benefit or sense in doing so?

I don't support it, and I think it will do nothing to help achieve their goal. Having said that, I don't really need to keep arguing a point on which we clearly disagree and are not likely to resolve. I expect there are things going on there right now that are a better use of this space.

Apparently FECQ (college students) and FEUQ (university students) are floating an offer to the government, in a last-ditch attempt to stop the fascist legislation, but CLASSE is said to not be onside. Without seeing the words, it sounds like the way I was "interpreting" the May 5 agreement - namely, efficiency savings are applied to admin fees, and if admin fees are down to zero, then remaining savings are applied to tuition fees. In my version, they would not (for optics' sake) touch tuition fees, but rather generate a "rebate" in that case. Bärlüer praised my creative thinking, but threw cold water by saying it was probably a stretch. I think he was correct, but I thought it was worth a try. Of course, all that became moot when Charest and Beauchamp bragged that they had conceded nothing, and the students overwhelmingly rejected the deal. There were naturally other poison pills in the deal, such as the right of the Minister to veto any recommendations from the unfairly-constituted council responsible for looking for savings.

We're clearly in the final strokes of this phase, and much will be happening in the coming hours. I'd appreciate if certain posters keep their philosophical debates to a separate thread so that we can report the news here in an informative and readable way. Thanks.

I have heard the same types of argument as yours to justify scabbing. As long it was one of the people working in the plant originally what harm is it for them to keep working? How does it detract from the effectiveness of the other INDIVIDUAL workers right to strike? Personally a scab is a scab is a scab.

As Unionist points out most jurisdictions allow for scabs so it is exactly the same for these students. There is no law preventing either a scab from going to work or a student from crossing to go to class. The only thing that has every really prevented it is the concept of solidarity and moral suasion in the form of shaming the selfish few who align themselves with the totalitarian state. Being in the for front of filing injunctions is likely a good career move as well, if you want to get a real good job in our emerging security state.

A word of caution you claimed I don't have to follow Harper's dictates but I must warn you that when he says something is a crime he has a goon squad to back him up. They don't play nice and as Toronto's police riot shows they don't even play legally.

"I'm asking Mr. Charest to avoid committing an irreparable act. With special legislation, everyone will lose," she said.

"The people of Québec want this crisis to end with a negotiated agreement," she added.

Mme Marois believes that "the solution is there for the asking". That solution is the proposal made by FECQ yesterday evening to the new Minister of Eduation, Michelle Courchesne. It suggests a moratorium - without using that word - on fee hikes for next autumn.

Sounds like a decent compromise to me, but I'm not sure what CLASSE's objection is yet, and with Charest checking the polls every 5 seconds, I'm pessimistic about a settlement.

With respect my friend you are engaging in silencing again because you want to control the discourse on this board. Please consider your posts more carefully and not be such a control freak.

Fine. I'll consider my posts more carefully. And you can post whatever you like here. My request was that we leave this open for discussion about what is actually going on in Québec right now. And you can disagree with that request and post whatever you want here. It doesn't matter all that much in the greater scheme of things. But thanks for reminding me about the rhetorical first sentence that I posted.

Listen, I apologize for my tone in posts 65 and 70. I'm just nervous and frankly a bit scared about what's going to happen here next, and I should definitely not be taking that out on friends and allies.

Apology accepted. I did not know this thread was meant to be an info only thread. In fact your discussions above with other posters plus your first post led me to believe otherwise.

This thread will come to a close soon so please if you start the next one please indicate that it is an info thread and I will do my best not to engage in philosophical debates despite that being one of but not the only the reason I come here.

I have really appreciated the information and wish I could be there to stand beside them in solidarity. Us iaioflautas need to stand and fight with the youth.

Several hundred scantily-clad demonstrators are gathering at the usual place (Parc Émilie-Gamelin) to prepare for the nightly demo, which will begin in a few minutes.

Meanwhile, indications are that Charest's special legislation will have two aspects: 1. "Civil disobedience" - heavy penalties for blocking access to scabs. 2. Amendment to the education act which prescribes that the session must be 82 days.

The MSM (CBC and CTV) continue to report it's a minority - in the range of 35% - that are out of classes demonstrating against the tuition increases. Any comment on that figure from those who are watching all this firsthand? I remember seeing the photos from May 1st and thinking it looks like the entire student body is out there.

Sounds like a decent compromise to me, but I'm not sure what CLASSE's objection is yet, and with Charest checking the polls every 5 seconds, I'm pessimistic about a settlement.

The way I read La Presse's article about this, it seems that CLASSE's objection is that they're not prepared to go as far as agreeing to recommend such a proposal to its members (as opposed to just agreeing to put up to vote the proposal in the previous rounds of negotiations):

But all that might be moot if the government is dead set to adopt the special legislation, which is what is suggested in La Presse's latest article.

If they do adopt the special legislation, things could very likely get messier...

We'll have to see what sort of language is in there. Two possibilities at each end of the continuum:

1. The language of the special legislation is somewhat narrow WRT what constitutes "blocking access". Symbolic/soft pickets continue. Recourses against students/representatives for violating the special legislation are made. Tensions remain high.

2. The language of the special legislation is very wide WRT what constitutes "blocking access". It becomes very hard to continue any form of picketing without exposing oneself to illegality and harsh sanctions. Odds on a serious constitutional challenge of the special legislation, despite remaining limited given the general conservatism of courts, nonetheless increase. More radical actions are taken against an extremely repressive gesture by the government. Tensions remain high.

I think some babblers are taking a very (bourgeois) legalistic approach to defining strikebreakers. This enabled Québecor (Péladeau) to use cyberscabs to keep first le Journal de Québec, then le Journal de Montréal, afloat. Obviously communications-sector workers don't have to physically break picket lines any more. All scabs (except for a handful of ideological scabs such as Richard Martineau) have legitimate material reasons for breaking solidarity, but the net effect is destroying the rights of the working class (whether a labour strike, rent strike or student strike) and shoring up the power of the 1%.
This is happening exactly 40 years after Boubou's special laws and the jailing of the leaders of Québec's major labour unions - not just the three union central presidents, but scores of lesser-known activists.

The Québec Bar Association has put out a pretty good statement, calling for a return to negotiations with a 3-person panel of independent mediators. While talking about the rule of law and the importance of respecting it, they also raise the crucial point that the representatives of the student associations are legitimate representatives within the framework of Québec legislation. It's a slap in the face to Charest, whose minions keep repeating (for months) that the direct-democracy general assemblies of the student associations have no power to bind anyone to anything, etc.

the simple foil to charest's legislation is for the teachers to refuse to cross the picket line, which might require some sort of strike to avoid legal retaliation. what's funny is how much of an island mcgill is in all of this, just a society apart.

MONTREAL – Bar hopping, shopping and dining out in downtown Montreal are taking a hit due to ongoing student protests that business owners say are chasing their customers away due to traffic headaches.

The owner of downtown landmark Ziggy’s Pub, frequented by the late author Mordecai Richler, said his patrons aren’t sticking around for after-work drinks. He estimates business has dropped 60 per cent.

“A lot of people, as soon as the day is finished, they get into their cars and go back home,” said Ziggy Eichenbaum, whose pub is on Crescent Street, a well-known destination for restaurants and bars.....

the simple foil to charest's legislation is for the teachers to refuse to cross the picket line, which might require some sort of strike to avoid legal retaliation.

Teachers can't strike legally unless their collective agreement has expired and the mandatory period has elapsed, including conciliation etc. While students can stay away from class without any legal risk, that's not the case for workers. They can be fined, fired, or worse.

It would all be different if the labour movement and student movement found a way to unite their forces in a meaningful way, meaning mutual support beyond finances and organization. But that's easier said than done.

"Useless," "dangerous," "arbitrary": Regulation Antimask that is about to adopt the City of Montreal has been denounced in every key by twenty organizations and citizens who marched Wednesday in public consultation.

Virtually no aspect of this regulation has found favor in the eyes of stakeholders, unanimously denounce. The requirement to disclose the location or the route of an event, for example, has been described as an "open door to selective judgments" by the president of the League of Rights and Freedoms, Dominique Peschard.

"The implementation of this regulation mainly rely on the discretion of police officers who will implement it, he believes. We ask the Montreal elected to refuse to adopt a resolution deemed dangerous, violates the rights and freedoms and potentially unconstitutional. "...

Whether you agree or disagree with the proposed increase in tuition, whether you agree or disagree with the tactics students, whether you agree or disagree with the firmness of the positions of the Class, they either agree or disagree with the strike and agree or disagree with the boycott ...

Can we at least agree on this?

The government has badly mismanaged the issue, he waited too long, it has dragged its feet. And hardening its attitude to risk making things worse.

Can we? Can we agree on that?

I ask you?

Should we not all agree on this point to ask him to resolve the crisis without resorting to the special law?

We can not think of strength. Neither teaching force. The school should be the last bastion of free thought. Where is the forging and feeds. It does not happen with a riot squad and an ambulance at the door. It does not happen with batons and injunctions.

College professors who are forced to teach in this context are in an untenable situation. How to teach police officers in the corridor? How teachers at red square can they give their courses with confidence in some students at green square? Hello atmosphere ...

"There is something violent to force a teacher to teach some of his students. It's like saying: You have three children, now, you're going to promote. I do not want to choose, "said a teacher at Red Square.

Like many of his colleagues, he wept when he realized he was forced to teach, despite the strike vote majority in his college. Many teachers feel between a rock and a hard place. Caught between their professional ethics and social conscience, between law and logic. They are forced to teach in a context antipédagogique. The psychological pressure is untenable. "They are neither learning conditions or teaching conditions. CEGEP, it's not a Walmart! "

Many students who file an injunction measure the extent of their evil act, he observes. "Some do not know a teacher subject to an injunction is punishable by $ 50 000 fine and one year in prison."

Be neutral and benevolent when you teach in this environment is very difficult. Especially since the logic of the injunctions is incompatible with that which would prevail in a place of learning. "It's a logical individualizing. While the logic of course is a logical group. "

That leads to situations perfectly absurd. That of a drama teacher, for example, forced to give over to two students in two different groups. "It's very difficult to make a drama class by itself ..."

The logic of the injunction is against the very act of teaching, he observes. A teacher should, as part of his duties, make a judgment on the student's work. A judgment to be as objective as possible. But if that judgment is subject to an injunction and the student fails, will it be considered that there was prejudice? "It is impossible as a teacher to feel totally objective. It is impossible for the student to feel he is judged objectively. "There's a blur that results in extremely difficult situations and difficult.

Thousands of parents may well have to find a plan B to keep their children during the summer. Several day camps are planning to cancel full weeks of work due to lack of personnel or space because of the student strike, Press has learned.

"It's a very big problem," sighs the group's president Sportmax, Yves Latour, who manages six day camp in Montreal, in the northern suburbs and the Outaouais region, three of which normally use the local CEGEP Saint-Laurent Lionel-Groulx and Ottawa, who are or have been on strike. He said up to 8,000 children could be affected by the repercussions of the conflict in these three institutions only.

Same story at Day Camp Chicago, which houses the college of the same name. "We're starting to stress a little, admits the director, Linda Roy. We do not want to alarm our customers, but our pool of staff comes mostly colleges and universities, and our facilities may be occupied longer than expected. Things are moving so fast that it is very difficult to plan B or C. "In Longueuil, it was not until the war ended before stopping scenario.....

Let’s look at Tremblay. Last Thursday night, he called a press conference to address the coordinated smokebomb attack that prompted a shutdown of Montreal’s metro system earlier that morning. Instead of addressing the specific issue, the mayor spent about fifteen minutes talking about the student protests and the affect they have had on the city.

The problem here, and it’s a big one, is that as the mayor was speaking, there was absolutely no proven link between the incident and the movement. Since, some of the suspects have turned themselves in, but there is still no proof that they were acting on behalf of anyone but themselves and maybe a group that thinks the CLASSE isn’t radical enough.

Even in the unlikely event that a stronger link comes to light, Tremblay’s speech and especially his condescending remark that parents and grandparents should tell their kids to “go back to school” are off-topic at best, uncalled for and offensive. But you could see it in his eyes that he believed what he was saying and felt he was doing the right thing.

For him, there is no validity to this protest, the activists have had their fun and should give up so we can get back to the more serious, grown up matters of commerce, demolishing buildings and banning masks at protests. Unfortunately, he’s not the only one who feels this way....

Unfortunately, it doesn’t stop there. Now, following the scare in the metro and constant anti-student talking points in the media, ordinary people, even some whose views I respect on many other issues, are getting on board with Charest and company. I think it has to do with the emotion that those in power are now speaking with.

It is real emotion, too. You see, this is no longer about a few hundred dollars in fee increases. It is an ideological war. On one side you find neoliberal austerity, corporate kickbacks and bureaucratic defense of the status quo. On the other, you find a fairer society, progressive ideas and the voice of the future.

It’s no wonder people like Charest and Tremblay are so passionate about protecting their interests in this matter. Their very authority and way of life are at stake. It’s also no surprise the students are passionate as well. Their future and the global revolution that started with the Arab Spring and spread to North America with the Occupy movement is being challenged here at home. That’s why they won’t cave, no matter how many cops and editorial comments the establishment throws at them.

The time has come for everyone else to take sides. The time has come for everyone else to realize that this isn’t about a few hundred dollars in fee increase. It’s about what kind of future we hope to have.

Tonight, May 16, 23:00 at Parc Émilie-Gamelin (Berri Square), spontaneous protest against the special law and against rising tuition fees.

The first part of this special law is to postpone (cancel) the session in order to break the movement.

Moreover, the government will pass a special law making it illegal picket line or any disturbance to enforce the strike mandates taken democratically. This decision is an attack on the rights of all citizens and all citizens of Quebec, a totalitarian drift over the Liberal government. We reached a point where the front of popular discontent, the government tries to force a return to class by the truncheon, plastic bullets and grenades. His response to our demands? This is repression! We say it publicly, we are against this unjust law. We will not allow the right to strike be butchered. We will not let the corrupt government do so. Butchered ON OUR RIGHTS? CHARCUTONS THE GOVERNMENT!